• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Red Dot Sights (Reflex Sights) on Spotting Scopes (3 Viewers)

Torchepot

Well-known member
United Kingdom
Thanks Henning for your generosity in making your design publically available.

One question I wanted to check with you regarding the mounting of the sight.

From memory your sight looks like this

http://amzn.eu/duuKW98

Please correct me if I've got the wrong one.

My query is whether you would need an adapter to fit your scope attachment?


Cheers


Phil
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Phil,

Thanks Henning for your generosity in making your design publically available.

One question I wanted to check with you regarding the mounting of the sight.

From memory your sight looks like this

http://amzn.eu/duuKW98

Please correct me if I've got the wrong one.

My query is whether you would need an adapter to fit your scope attachment?

You're welcome - the design really owes much to your input, too! :)

The sight you linked basically the same sight Vollmeise and I have (which is available under dozens of different names). The version you linked will fit on my rail with no adapter just fine.

Regards,

Henning

PS: There's some madness in naming these rails ... NATO/Picatinny/Weaver are all compatible, and for no good reasons any of these is called "20 mm rail" on the internet, or "22 mm rail", or any mm number in the vague vicinity. Once the mm number gets closer to 10, it's probably the "11 mm dovetail rail", which has different mm number names with a bit more of a justification since it's not standardized and varies wildly in width and shape. Add designation variants in inches, and it becomes a perfect mess! <Edit: And then there is the video community's "NATO", which doesn't comply with the STANAG 4649 specification because it has no slots. That makes them usuitable to mount sights because sights are built to interface with the slots to ensure they can't slide along the rail.>

Fortunately, the NATO rail family is easy to recognize from its flat hexagon shape, and the dovetail looks quite different :)
 
Last edited:

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi again,

Here's a draft for a configurable mounting:

View attachment 652896

Today, the printed part arrived. I haven't done a thorough test yet, but I'm happy with the looks and fit of the part.

It still is possible to twist it out of adjustment by force. Maybe I'll have to increase the gap width of the collar a bit to allow it to be tightened tighter.

Somehow, I didn't have a fitting screw for the installation of the arm. All I can say for now is that though the arm has to be pushed into position with some slight force, just as it should be, it still has some play in elevation if the attachment block is not clamped down.

Here some pictures:

Nato Collar.jpg

Nato Collar 2.jpg

Nato Collar 3.jpg

Regards,

Henning
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Phil,

Had a closer look at the Kowa and the collar for the TSN-PA7 looks ideal

http://www.kowaproducts.com/digiscoping/TSN-PA7_DSLR_Digiscoping_Adapter/

Nice and secure with plenty of room to attach a mount. I don't know if the collar is available separately though?

Thinking a bit more about it, it would be ideal if that collar had a hole drilled in its circumference to allow locking the sight adapter securely against twisting.

I just sent an email to my contact at Kowa asking for the availability of the TSN-PA7 collar, and included the suggestion about that extra hole.

As much as I enjoy tinkering, I would be fine with buying a finished product from the manufacturer, too! Provided they do a better job than I could, of course ;-)

Regards,

Henning
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Dave,

Wow, iron sights also! I love it.

Thanks! :) The iron sights sort of invented themselves ... with the first prototype, I noticed I was sighting along the rail even before the actual sight was attached, and then found that the lightening hole near the top was even better for that purpose.

I thought I'd that sighting tube to the rail mounting arm just to be on the safe side ... you start packing everything up, the the sight is off and under its cover, and of course that's just the moment the bird you've given up on chooses to arrive.

That's when the little sighting tube saves the day :)

I'm not quite sure yet what shape would be the best. The circular one seems to be a bit difficult to read when your eye position is slightly off centre. Not sure if a square one would be better ...

Regards,

Henning
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi,

Would just the iron sight be adequate?

No comparison, really :)

Reflex sights give a sight image focused at infinity that stays on target even when you move your eye relative to the sight.

With an iron sight, you have to bring your eye to a very precise position and keep it there, and you can only focus on either the sight or on the target. If you focus on the target in order not to lose it, it becomes even more difficult to keep the eye in the correct position.

It would easily be possible to design another "arm" for the attachment ring that carries iron sights designed as primary sights. You could also put commercially available iron sights on the standard arm - it's NATO rail, after all However, iron sights for reason of ergonomy and accuracy require a fairly long "sight radius", and are best placed as far forward as possible.

I'd also use some kind of crosshairs or ring-and-bead arrangement to make the sight easier to read than the tube. Additionally, to be really accurate, the arm would need some adjustment mechanism (which the current design doesn't have, as the reflex sight is adjustable).

Quick draft:

Iron Sight Side Mount Variable 6 Cable Tie 12h.png Iron Sight Side Mount Variable 6 Cable Tie 12h 2.png

And in the end, you really save only 30 EUR, 132 g of weight, and one Lithium battery that lasts years in normal use, while dealing with a much less convenient set of sights.

Regards,

Henning
 

etudiant

Registered User
Supporter
Hi,



No comparison, really :)

Reflex sights give a sight image focused at infinity that stays on target even when you move your eye relative to the sight.

With an iron sight, you have to bring your eye to a very precise position and keep it there, and you can only focus on either the sight or on the target. If you focus on the target in order not to lose it, it becomes even more difficult to keep the eye in the correct position.

It would easily be possible to design another "arm" for the attachment ring that carries iron sights designed as primary sights. You could also put commercially available iron sights on the standard arm - it's NATO rail, after all However, iron sights for reason of ergonomy and accuracy require a fairly long "sight radius", and are best placed as far forward as possible.

I'd also use some kind of crosshairs or ring-and-bead arrangement to make the sight easier to read than the tube. Additionally, to be really accurate, the arm would need some adjustment mechanism (which the current design doesn't have, as the reflex sight is adjustable).

Quick draft:

View attachment 654742 View attachment 654743

And in the end, you really save only 30 EUR, 132 g of weight, and one Lithium battery that lasts years in normal use, while dealing with a much less convenient set of sights.

Regards,

Henning

Thank you, that answers the question very fully.
 

Super Dave

Well-known member
Wow, awesome Henning. Thank you very much. I'm going to try it out.

Are there any 3D printers in the USA that are recommended?

Thanks a lot,
Dave
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Dave,

Are there any 3D printers in the USA that are recommended?

I've had most of my stuff printed by Shapeways, and have been a happy customer so far.

My experience is with the Dutch branch only, but I'd think that the US company offers the same quality of service :)

The price Shapeways indicates to me, if I enter "USA" as a location, is $9.85 for the black version (shipping not included).

Regards,

Henning
 

Super Dave

Well-known member
Amazing Henning,

I'm going to print one of your lens covers too. I'm blown away.

I can't believe all the options. What material do you suggest:
- Strong and Flexible Plastic $8.95
- Metallic Plastic $13.98
- HP Nylon Plastic $19.69

Or is there another material that you found better?

Thanks,
Dave
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Dave,

So far, I've ordered everything in "strong and flexible", usually black/coloured (for looks, and the "polished" finish is very slightly smoother).

Regards,

Henning
 

Super Dave

Well-known member
Thank you again Henning. That is very generous of you.

This was my first experience ordering a product like this. It's kind of mind blowing.

The shipping was only $4.99 and the total was $14.84. Very exciting and fun. I will post photos of how it turns out.

Aloha,
Dave
 

Hauksen

Forum member
Hi Etudiant,

Would just the iron sight be adequate?

I finally got around to make some photographs of the "iron sight" I created for my camera:

DSC04109s.jpg DSC04110s.jpg

While this is a nice small and light gadget, the photograph taken from behind the camera already shows a bit of the focusing problems I mentioned, with only one set of crosshairs being in focus.

If you focus on the bird you're trying to photograph, both sets of crosshairs are out of focus to the point that it become difficult to align them with any kind of precision.

(It gets better if you hold the camera at arm's length, but that's sort of inconvenient. I still have to test the sight in a birding context ... it seems fine and convenient to use at shorter focal lengths, but all the "iron sights" disadvantages I pointed out above do of course apply.)

The sports sight itself can be downloaded here:

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2823806

Regards,

Henning
 

etudiant

Registered User
Supporter
Hi Etudiant,



I finally got around to make some photographs of the "iron sight" I created for my camera:

View attachment 656573 View attachment 656574

While this is a nice small and light gadget, the photograph taken from behind the camera already shows a bit of the focusing problems I mentioned, with only one set of crosshairs being in focus.

If you focus on the bird you're trying to photograph, both sets of crosshairs are out of focus to the point that it become difficult to align them with any kind of precision.

(It gets better if you hold the camera at arm's length, but that's sort of inconvenient. I still have to test the sight in a birding context ... it seems fine and convenient to use at shorter focal lengths, but all the "iron sights" disadvantages I pointed out above do of course apply.)

The sports sight itself can be downloaded here:

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2823806

Regards,

Henning

Very nice!
I'd hoped that such a sight would be good enough to allow the photographer to easily hold track on a flying bird, but your experience suggests things are not so clear cut. Will be very interested to hear how the sight performed for you in a birding context.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top